67 years of street cred - climate dood quits, sez its all a big load!

[quade 4]

Quote

What you alleged was wrong. It was outright wrong. Proveably wrong.

You say it's provably wrong that the timing of the resignation is questionable?

Oh please. The one thing about the deniers is that they'll NEVER pass up an opportunity to attempt to mold the thoughts of people just before an election. Every bit of doubt they can generate about anyone that has ever supported the concept is a "win" for them.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Quote

What you alleged was wrong. It was outright wrong. Proveably wrong.

You say it's provably wrong that the timing of the resignation is questionable?

Oh please. The one thing about the deniers is that they'll NEVER pass up an opportunity to attempt to mold the thoughts of people just before an election. Every bit of doubt they can generate about anyone that has ever supported the concept is a "win" for them.

What say you about them not following their own rules?
I think that, if Lawrocket is to be believed, adn I have no reason to doubt him in this

Quote

The 200 signatures is required by the APS rules to petition for the creation of a topical group. The signatures were collected without access to the membership list. "We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution,"

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

What you alleged was wrong. It was outright wrong. Proveably wrong.

You say it's provably wrong that the timing of the resignation is questionable?

Oh please.

No. You sardonically asked why he didn't resign last year. I gave the reason. Your insinuation was wrong.

Quote

The one thing about the deniers is that they'll NEVER pass up an opportunity to attempt to mold the thoughts of people just before an election.

He didn't resign in October 08. Therefore, he is not a denier by your rule (October 08 was a chance that he missed).

Or, your rule is invalid. I'd suggest the latter.

Quote

Every bit of doubt they can generate about anyone that has ever supported the concept is a "win" for them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transference

You have done NOTHING but attempt to generate doubt about the guy. Sure, the APS didn't even deny that it failed to abide by its own Constitution and bylaws. But that's not the issue. The issue is this guy who resigned and it's been made public. Clearly, he's a nutjob denier with no intelligence and a lacky of the oil companies.

I think that global warming could be most effectively controlled by eliminating all the damned hot air.

Paul - it is OKAY to say, "I was wrong. I have no evidence to suggest that this was an electioneering ploy." Well, it's not okay, I guess, if facts are more important than rhetoric and smearing.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

What you alleged was wrong. It was outright wrong. Proveably wrong.

You say it's provably wrong that the timing of the resignation is questionable?

Oh please. The one thing about the deniers is that they'll NEVER pass up an opportunity to attempt to mold the thoughts of people just before an election. Every bit of doubt they can generate about anyone that has ever supported the concept is a "win" for them.

You say that as if the warmists don't do the same thing, and more - climate change being taught in schools, anyone?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[quade 4]

Quote

You say that as if the warmists don't do the same thing, and more - climate change being taught in schools, anyone?

Well, yes, at some point after the Scopes Monkey Trial evolution started to be taught in schools. Yes, there are deniers there too, but those deniers also have no basis in fact.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

You say that as if the warmists don't do the same thing, and more - climate change being taught in schools, anyone?

Well, yes, at some point after the Scopes Monkey Trial evolution started to be taught in schools. Yes, there are deniers there too, but those deniers also have no basis in fact.

Nice rebuttal - unfortunately, you've got your sides mixed, though.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[skipbelt 0]

deniers is a perjorative to link opponents to holocaust deniers . also meant to put opponents on defense . but i welcome the tag. i deny warming or climate change is a scientific fact. or even a consensus . i deny evolution is a scientific fact. and if the warmers and evolutionists were intellectually honest , they would be deniers too !

[quade 4]

I'm curious, in your opinion, is the Earth approximately round or flat?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[skipbelt 0]

yet another weak and lame attack with the goal of guilt by association !

[quade 4]

Quote

yet another weak and lame attack with the goal of guilt by association !

Nope. Just trying to find your level of acceptance of what the vast majority of scientists consider as the truth about how the world operates.

Right now there is a portion of the population that doesn't believe in global warming, but the vast majority of scientists do. The vast majority of the population does believe in evolution, as do the vast majority of scientists. The vast majority of the population believes the earth is approximately round. Scientists consider it to be a fact.

At one time . . . very few people would have believed in any of this.

I just want to know where you are on that scale and also WHY. If you don't believe in evolution, then you must have a reason. Most people that don't believe in it do so because they believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible.

However, most people that don't believe in evolution will eventually concede the Earth is more or less round, yet there's no mention of that in the Bible at all. In fact, the Bible is a pretty horrible source of scientific information. It routinely gets its facts wrong about all sorts of things including basic math like the value of Pi.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[skipbelt 0]

why are you so hung up on belief ? it has nothing to do with science . are you familiar with the scientific method ? the world's measurements are known . evolution and global warmings metrics are not , that's why they're theories ! i said global warming , but i'll answer to climate change or whatever intellectually dishonest term is in vogue because the last term has been exposed as fraud . hang on a sec , i have to set my climate controller !

[lurch 0]

No power to recharge it? You missed the relevant fact that the whole point of scaling it up would be to combine these puppies with a wind farm or solar station.

These things are nothing more than gigantic kinetic batteries. Wind farm makes juice. Juice is stored kinetically in a rotating mass. I don't have the figures for this but I can take a pretty good wild-ass-guess based on what I've seen. I'm guessing that much like a battery, it is considered "dead" or fully discharged long before it has stopped and can produce no output voltage.

So "Full" probably means full-spec max speed 16000 rpm. You tap the power off the rotating mass by inductive coupling. "dead" probably means after x number of minutes of magnetic loading, the thing has slowed down to maybe 14000-12000 rpm.

Wind blows, flywheels speed up. Wind stops, flywheels begin to dump juice into grid and there is no interruption in power. Wind comes up again, you start feeding the juice back into the slowest flywheels.

My guess is, for best energy capture you'd actually need a lot more of these units than the minimum, so that you could keep a few deliberately at less-than-max state. It can't store energy if its already fully spun up.

So if you wanted to do this on a REALLY major scale, 500+ MW, it would certainly get big. But I'd far rather see a vast patch of empty desert with a grid of 4 or even 100,000 of these puppies storing enough juice to run NY and Chicago for a day or a week, than the continued wholesale destruction of entire regions you get with "mountaintop removal" coal mining. I've seen pics of this and its appalling... They are manufacturing Mordor as a side effect of power production, destroying vast swaths of terrain and leaving blasted wasteland behind them. It is madness and it cannot last forever but if the practice is not halted and replaced with something sustainable, by the time they're done half the appalacians will have been reduced to rubble. Its an ongoing environmental crime on the scale of anything the soviets did, and once those mountains are gone they are gone forever.

How long your stored flywheel juice lasts is exactly like any battery technology. How big do you want it to be? How long do you want it to last? Their 4th generation standard unit is the one in production right now, 25kwh. Compared to how big they are the energy density isn't all that high really. A 25kw generator is a fraction of the size. But space is cheap, the world is not short of places people don't live and land that can't be used for anything.

Heres a little napkin math. I'm bad at math and have to make a bunch of assumptions but I'll probably be in the ballpark here so bear with me.

Each gen4 unit stores 25kwh. So 25,000 watts for 1 hour before the mass has slowed down to the point of uselessness. Thats enough to run a couple houses for a little while...couple hours maybe. It ain't much... a pinprick of juice, really, up until you start ganging these suckers together by the dozens and hundreds.

25kwh also=5kw x5 hours, or 2.5x10h, or 1.25kw x 20 hours meaning roughly enough juice in that silo to run a single space heater for 20 hours give or take a couple hundred watts.

I haven't seen their fullscale plant. Its in NY. Since its being used for frequency stabilization, I.E. evening out short term spikes in grid loading, fast capacity matters more than storage time. Thus each unit is also good for 100kw/15 minutes, 200kw/7.5, 400,000 watts for 3:15.

Their strategy for this is very smart actually. Their proof plant doesn't need to be huge to perform its function since if you're not relying on it to power a town for a day you can suck megawatts out of just a handful of silos for just the few minutes you need it to absorb the load at 4:15 PM when half of the state gets home from work and turns on their TVs and air conditioners all at once. Their info says the station under construction in NY which I may actually be sent to work at as a fab rat if I land the job is 20MW but doesn't say how long it can sustain it so I can't judge how big it actually is.

Lets say you want to get rid of a 400MW standby natural gas station. You've got this gigantic station whose only purpose in life is to sit idle till 4:05 PM and fire up and run so its got juice on tap for the period from 4:15 to 4:30 during which all those commuters are turning on TVs and stuff. Lets pretend we only need to sustain the added load on the grid for 15 minutes.

so 1 silo=100kw, 10=1MW, 100=10 MW, which is a 10x10 grid of these things maybe the size of a soccer field and means your 400MW megastation can be replaced by a BIG grid of 4000 of these suckers stashed out in the desert somewhere, a few hundred acres 40 silos wide and 100 silos long. Probably not economic, but if you just keep making them and adding to it over a decade or two at a few million bucks a year its not all that bad.

And all this is assuming it was done with their "itty bitty" 25 kwh units. They're only on gen4. I'd imagine their engineers are hard at work on the gen5 50KWH unit... twice the mass but the silo doesn't get THAT much bigger. Gen6 might be a 100kwh unit with a 10,000lb rotating mass and a silo only twice the size and suddenly your 400MW surge plant gets much smaller. I'd be interested to know the physical limits of just how big can you make each unit? How bout a single 1MWH unit with a 50-ton rotating mass, or a 2MWH 100-ton version? Heavy industry is HUGE... the big stuff for manipulating energies on that scale can weigh thousands of tons. Keep scaling it up... how bout a single 20MWH, 1000-ton rotor unit? NOW we're talking. Compared to doing it with a zillion little ones, such a storage plant would be quite compact, each silo probably about the size of your typical farm silo and your 400MW plant occupies a space the size of a small to medium New England farm. By that point, your station could store the entire days' output of a wind farm by increasing a couple dozen rotors' speed by 30 rpm or something.

You want to scale it up that size it'll be big, it'll be bulky and it won't be cheap, but I bet it can be done easier and cheaper than building a nuke plant.

http://www.beaconpower.com/

Check out the links at their site for construction pics of the first gridscale plant. Its modest, but its a start.

I'd like to ask Billvon to weigh in on this topic because frankly when it comes to these things I'm fuckin' ignorant and I'd imagine he could tell far more about this just from deduction based on the information available than I could. If I get a job with these people its because they have plenty of engineers but they're short of hands-on fab rats that can grind, weld, use a crane, run wire, operate the gear they're making the flywheels with and come up with practical ideas for upgrading it and do all that sort of thing, which is where I come in.
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[skipbelt 0]

renewable energy source online , how much of it has to be tapped to charge the "battery" assuming "battery" is dead , and 1 to 1 output ratio ?

[lurch 0]

So far as I know, very little of it actually. You can charge em fast or you can trickle charge em slow, and tap as much juice to charge it as the situation demands. Wind is low but still producing juice today? Fine, feed each flywheel only 1kw and the speed builds up gradually. More efficient that way anyway since you lose less power as waste heat warming the wiring, hysteresis losses in the coils, resistance of the wiring, Ohm's law and all that.
You got high winds today but they're gusting 10-35 mph? Your storage plant is working like hell, then. One minute the wind dies off and the rotors are dumping megawatts into the grid to keep the output the same and decelerating at a rate of 100rpm/minute. Then you get 5 minutes of high wind and you stash half that juice back into the flywheels feeding em 10KW each and accelerating em back up to speed at 10rpm/minute or whatever.

The whole point is, they aren't an energy source themselves. They just make renewable energy sources which are often irregular, able to produce power consistently over time and thus far more practical and usable. Their website details using it for solar and wind the same way I've described here. Right now wind and solar are more of a trendy "green" publicity stunt than anything else and cannot be relied on for more than a fraction of a percent of power needs. These things will keep the juice coming in between gusts or clouds, and suddenly your renewable solar or windfarm is RELIABLE. So this is an enabling technology that will in turn make wind and solar become worthwhile investments. Instead of the pitiful few hundred megawatts of wind and solar in existence, it becomes practical to build gigawatts worth of it.
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[Kennedy 0]

Warming or not; law, theory, hypothesis, or idiocy; whatever.
What do you think of APS violating its own rules?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[skipbelt 0]

room temperature super conductors and aerogel should be great technologies to employ on this project !

[lurch 0]

Room temp superconductors, definitely. RTS would be great for cutting losses if they ever get it sorted to the point you can build motors and transformers out of it. But I'm not seeing much of a way to use aerogel with this stuff. They've already made the tech work fine without either. Whatcha got in mind for the stuff here? Anything specific?
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[quade 4]

Quote

Warming or not; law, theory, hypothesis, or idiocy; whatever.
What do you think of APS violating its own rules?

I'm not 100% certain they did. Lewis says they did, but have you read the APS by-laws on how they work? I haven't.

Much like how the USPA operates, I assume there are some pretty strict by-laws for dealing with some things, yet their management has the option to reject certain issues out of hand.

For instance, if you got 200 USPA members together and petitioned to put up a vote to let 14-year-olds jump, my guess is they'd reject it out of hand and it would never come to a vote of the general membership or even the BOD. Some issues are of such profound and fundamental importance to most organizations that they will simply reject them and it's not something up for vote.

I mean, suppose I got together a group of 200 members and petitioned them to say, reject the concept of time. How do you think that would go?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[skipbelt 0]

i didn't know if you were out of prototype and into beta testiing , just throwing ideas around . aerogel would be a great insulater for the rts !

[rhaig 0]

Quote

I mean, suppose I got together a group of 200 members and petitioned them to say, reject the concept of time. How do you think that would go?

very slowly.

--
Rob

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Quote

I mean, suppose I got together a group of 200 members and petitioned them to say, reject the concept of time. How do you think that would go?

very slowly.

In a timely fashion?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Quote

Warming or not; law, theory, hypothesis, or idiocy; whatever.
What do you think of APS violating its own rules?

I'm not 100% certain they did. Lewis says they did, but have you read the APS by-laws on how they work? I haven't.

http://www.aps.org/about/governance/constitution.cfm

Quote

ARTICLE VIII - DIVISIONS, TOPICAL GROUPS, AND FORUMS

Organization. - If at least two hundred members wish to advance and diffuse the knowledge of a specific subject or subfield of physics, they may petition the Council to establish a Topical Group. The Council shall distribute to the Chairperson and the Secretary-Treasurer of each existing Division and Topical Group a statement of the areas of interest of the proposed Topical Group for review and comment. Following Council approval, the new Topical Group shall be officially initiated and considered active when at least 200 members have enrolled. This must occur within 18 months. To remain active, a Topical Group must increase its enrollment to at least 300 within three years of approval. If at any time after the initial three-year period membership drops below enrollment of 300, the Topical Group shall become inactive and no longer allocate invited sessions at meetings or fellowship slots. If a Topical Group remains inactive for three years, it shall be automatically terminated.
snip

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[lawrocket 3]

reply]
I'm not 100% certain they did. Lewis says they did, but have you read the APS by-laws on how they work? I haven't.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

http://www.aps.org/about/governance/constitution.cfm
***ARTICLE VIII - DIVISIONS, TOPICAL GROUPS, AND FORUMS

Organization. - If at least two hundred members wish to advance and diffuse the knowledge of a specific subject or subfield of physics, they may petition the Council to establish a Topical Group. The Council shall distribute to the Chairperson and the Secretary-Treasurer of each existing Division and Topical Group a statement of the areas of interest of the proposed Topical Group for review and comment.

I bolded "shall." There is no discretion. This is a ministerial duty. Failure to do so is an "extraordinary step."


[Reply]Following Council approval, the new Topical Group shall be officially initiated and considered active when at least 200 members have enrolled.

[timmyfitz 0]

Quote

Right now there is a portion of the population that doesn't believe in global warming, but the vast majority of scientists do. The vast majority of the population does believe in evolution, as do the vast majority of scientists. The vast majority of the population believes the earth is approximately round. Scientists consider it to be a fact.

There was a time, several hundred years ago, when it was thought that the world was flat and most of the population, scholars and scientist of the time believed it.

There were a few (probably different number than your 200 out of 47,000 example) that went against the popular thinking by saying the earth is round. Those people were ostracized and some jailed because they went against popular belief.

I guess things really don't change much.







______________________________________________________________________________________________________
"1981 to 1988 is 7 years"-Kallend (oops, it's actually 8 years Kallend)

The decade of the 80's was from 1980 to 1989. 10 years. If you remove 1980 and 1989 you have 1981 to 1988. 8 years.